```

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 85 (Monday, May 4, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25230-25232]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-10061]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

32 CFR Part 320

[Docket ID: DoD-2014-OS-0068]

Privacy Act; Implementation

AGENCY: National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), DoD.

ACTION: Direct final rule with request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) is updating the 
NGA Privacy Act Program by adding the (k)(2) and (k)(5) exemptions to 
accurately describe the basis for exempting the records in the system 
of records notice NGA-010, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency 
Security Financial Disclosure Reporting Records System. In this 
rulemaking, the NGA proposes to exempt portions of this system of 
records from one or more provisions of the Privacy Act because of 
criminal, civil and administrative enforcement requirements.

DATES: The rule will be effective on July 13, 2015 unless adverse 
comments are received by July 6, 2015. If adverse comment is received, 
the Department of Defense will publish a timely

[[Page 25231]]

withdrawal of the rule in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number and 
title, by any of the following methods:
    * Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    * Mail: Department of Defense, Office of the Deputy Chief 
Management Officer, Directorate of Oversight and Compliance, Regulatory 
and Audit Matters Office, 9010 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-
9010.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name 
and docket number for this Federal Register document. The general 
policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is 
to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet 
at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, 
including any personal identifiers or contact information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth James, Acting Branch Chief, 
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), Financial Disclosure 
Program Manager, 7500 GEOINT Drive, Springfield, VA 22150 or by calling 
571-557-0110.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This direct final rule makes non-substantive 
changes to the NGA rules. This will improve the efficiency and 
effectiveness of DoD's program by ensuring the integrity of the 
security and counterintelligence records by the NGA and the Department 
of Defense.
    This rule is being published as a direct final rule as the 
Department of Defense does not expect to receive any adverse comments, 
and so a proposed rule is unnecessary.

Direct Final Rule and Significant Adverse Comments

    DoD has determined this rulemaking meets the criteria for a direct 
final rule because it involves nonsubstantive changes dealing with 
DoD's management of its Privacy Programs. DoD expects no opposition to 
the changes and no significant adverse comments. However, if DoD 
receives a significant adverse comment, the Department will withdraw 
this direct final rule by publishing a notice in the Federal Register. 
A significant adverse comment is one that explains: (1) Why the direct 
final rule is inappropriate, including challenges to the rule's 
underlying premise or approach; or (2) why the direct final rule will 
be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. In determining whether 
a comment necessitates withdrawal of this direct final rule, DoD will 
consider whether it warrants a substantive response in a notice and 
comment process.

Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' and Executive 
Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review''

    It has been determined that Privacy Act rules for the Department of 
Defense are not significant rules. This rule does not (1) Have an 
annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely 
affect in a material way the economy; a sector of the economy; 
productivity; competition; jobs; the environment; public health or 
safety; or State, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) 
Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action 
taken or planned by another Agency; (3) Materially alter the budgetary 
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs, or the 
rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal 
or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's 
priorities, or the principles set forth in these Executive orders.

Public Law 96-354, ``Regulatory Flexibility Act'' (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6)

    It has been determined that this Privacy Act rule does not have 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
because it is concerned only with the administration of Privacy Act 
systems of records within the Department of Defense. A Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis is not required.

Public Law 96-511, ``Paperwork Reduction Act'' (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)

    It has been determined that this Privacy Act rule does not impose 
additional information collection requirements on the public under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

Section 202, Public Law 104-4, ``Unfunded Mandates Reform Act''

    It has been determined that this Privacy Act rule does not involve 
a Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local 
and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of 
$100 million or more and that this rulemaking will not significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments.

Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism''

    It has been determined that this Privacy Act rule does not have 
federalism implications. This rule does not have substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the National 
Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, no 
Federalism assessment is required.

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 320

    Privacy.

    Accordingly, 32 CFR part 320 is amended as follows:

PART 320--NATIONAL GEOSPATIAL-INTELLIGENCE AGENCY (NGA)

0
1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 320 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: Pub. L. 93-579, 88 Stat. 1986 (5 U.S.C. 552a).

0
2. In Sec.  320.12, add paragraph (f) to read as follows:

Sec.  320.12  Exemptions.

* * * * *
    (f) System identifier and name: NGA-010, National Geospatial-
Intelligence Agency Security Financial Disclosure Reporting Records 
System.
    (1) Exemptions: Investigatory material compiled for law enforcement 
purposes, other than material within the scope of subsection 5 U.S.C. 
552a(j)(2), may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2). However, if 
an individual is denied any right, privilege, or benefit for which he 
would otherwise be entitled by Federal law or for which he would 
otherwise be eligible, as a result of the maintenance of the 
information, the individual will be provided access to the information 
exempt to the extent that disclosure would reveal the identity of a 
confidential source. When claimed, this exemption allows limited 
protection of investigative reports maintained in a system of records 
used in personnel or administrative actions. Investigative material 
compiled solely for the purpose of determining suitability, 
eligibility, or qualifications for federal civilian employment, 
military service, federal contracts, or access to classified 
information may be exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5), but only to 
the extent that such material would reveal the identity of a 
confidential source.
    (2) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2) and (k)(5).
    (3) Reasons: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2), and (k)(5) the 
Director of NGA has exempted this system from the following provisions 
of the Privacy Act, subject to the limitation set forth in 5 U.S.C. 
552a(c)(3); (d); (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I); and (f). 
Exemptions from these particular subsections are justified, on a case-
by-case basis to be

[[Page 25232]]

determined at the time a request is made, for the following reasons:
    (i) From subsection (c)(3) (Accounting for Disclosures) because 
release of the accounting of disclosures could alert the subject of an 
investigation of an actual or potential criminal, civil, or regulatory 
violation to the existence of that investigation and reveal 
investigative interest on the part of NGA as well as the recipient 
agency. Disclosure of the accounting would therefore present a serious 
impediment to law enforcement efforts and/or efforts to preserve 
national security. Disclosure of the accounting would also permit the 
individual who is the subject of a record to impede the investigation, 
to tamper with witnesses or evidence, and to avoid detection or 
apprehension, which would undermine the entire investigative process. 
Analyst case notes will be kept separate from the individual's data 
submission. Those case notes will contain investigative case leads and 
summaries, sensitive processes, evidence gathered from external sources 
and potential referrals to law enforcement agencies.
    (ii) From subsection (d) (Access to Records) because access to the 
records contained in this system of records could inform the subject of 
an investigation of an actual or potential criminal, civil, or 
regulatory violation to the existence of that investigation and reveal 
investigative interest on the part of NGA or another agency. Access to 
the records could permit the individual who is the subject of a record 
to impede the investigation, to tamper with witnesses or evidence, and 
to avoid detection or apprehension. Amendment of the records could 
interfere with ongoing investigations and law enforcement activities 
and would impose an unreasonable administrative burden by requiring 
investigations to be continually reinvestigated. In addition, 
permitting access and amendment to such information could disclose 
security-sensitive information that could be detrimental to homeland 
security.
    (iii) From subsection (e)(1) (Relevancy and Necessity of 
Information) because in the course of investigations into potential 
violations of Federal law, the accuracy of information obtained or 
introduced occasionally may be unclear, or the information may not be 
strictly relevant or necessary to a specific investigation. In the 
interests of effective law enforcement, it is appropriate to retain all 
information that may aid in establishing patterns of unlawful activity.
    (iv) From subsections (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), and (e)(4)(I) (Agency 
Requirements) and (f) (Agency Rules), because portions of this system 
are exempt from the individual access provisions of subsection (d) for 
the reasons noted above, and therefore NGA is not required to establish 
requirements, rules, or procedures with respect to such access. 
Providing notice to individuals with respect to existence of records 
pertaining to them in the system of records or otherwise setting up 
procedures pursuant to which individuals may access and view records 
pertaining to themselves in the system would undermine investigative 
efforts and reveal the identities of witnesses, and potential 
witnesses, and confidential informants.

    Dated: April 27, 2015.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2015-10061 Filed 5-1-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
```